Thread: Flat Betting Eirescotts BP System

I flat bet Scotty's System and have never had a losing session. (BigDog & Zumma 1000). For decades I've searched for a system that would win consistently without a progression. I believe this is such a system. Congratulations Scotty on a job well done. Here is the betting strategy I use:
I substitute numbers for B & P as I am able to recognize patterns more easily. P=1, B=2.

So that PPP=111, BPB=212 etc. Here are the eight sets:
Two of the sets have 11 for the 1st two decisions.

111<
112<
121
122
211
212
221
222

Two sets have 11, two have 12, two have 21, and two have 22.
As I record the sets, if one set is: 111; and the next set is 112,
I consider these sets dormant. Should a third set begin with 11,
it is considered as "dead" Example:

111<1st set
221<2nd set
112<3rd set This 3rd set matches set #1 (first two numbers) If set #4 should begin with 11? it would not only not be considered as a betting opportunity, the room would be abandoned, and a new room started as it would be a pattern match.

One amazing result of watching the first two numbers in a set is: In a new room, if the first four sets contain diferent combinations of 1st two numbers in the set, the fifth set will usually match one of the four previous sets. Example:

112
122
211
222 (No repeats of first two numbers in sets)
122<(Matches 2nd set for a win)

I discovered this phenomenon while looking over my records. It won 18 times while losing only twice. On the two losing bets, it won on the next set.

I flat bet only. i start betting after four sets are in the room. I never bet dormant sets. A dormant set is one in which the first two numbers of the set match. Example:

111
112< dormant

A room with dormant sets, but playable:

1st 111<
2nd 112<
3rd 211<
4th 212< all dormant
5th 221< not dormant
6th 22X< bet here that "X"=1 for a win. If win, start new room. If "X"=2 set is dormant and a loss is incurred. Stay in the room as there are still two sets not in the room.
7th 121< not dormant yet.
8th 12X< bet here that "X"=1 for a match and a win. Start new room. If "X"=2 all eight sets are dormant. Start a new room.

I need to apologize to the Forum members for errors in the original thread. Hope this will clear up any misunderstandings. I stand by my original statement: I've never had a losing session. Therapy101

Originally Posted by Therapy101

One amazing result of watching the first two numbers in a set is: In a new room, if the first four sets contain diferent combinations of 1st two numbers in the set, the fifth set will usually match one of the four previous sets. Example:

112
122
211
222 (No repeats of first two numbers in sets)
122<(Matches 2nd set for a win)

I discovered this phenomenon while looking over my records. It won 18 times while losing only twice. On the two losing bets, it won on the next set.

That is a very good find, sounds interesting; I'll try to go through some old shoes to see if I can pick up on the pattern as well.

mattman

Hi Therapy,

Do you start to bet on 4 different sets? And even though some element is dominant, you will not bet on the 2nd element? Eg,

PPP
PBB
BBB
BBP
B?? <------ Will you bet on B on the 2nd element? What if there is another set before this that is BPP? You will ignore it even though there are 2 sets with B as 2nd element and one set with P, right?

Also for your losing sequence, why is there only a -1 on the 8th sets when there are a few betting chances before that?

I played a slight progression and is losing a little bit, so is amazed that flat betting is doing better.

Thanks
DG

Sometimes the match will happen on the 6th and 7th sets, and they are very common. Would you not lose money, or at best break even, on flat bet since you will be making a series of bets before the match?

Originally Posted by dg0412

Sometimes the match will happen on the 6th and 7th sets, and they are very common. Would you not lose money, or at best break even, on flat bet since you will be making a series of bets before the match?

In one of eirescott's posts, he talked about not betting until the "last possible betting opportunity". I never place a bet on the first or second number in a set. Bets are only placed on a set that is not dormant, and then only on the last number in the set. So, if two sets are dormant, they are considered "dead". Example:

112
111< these two sets are now dormant, so if a 3rd set should come up 11X, There is never, ever any bet. In fact, the set will now match one of the two previous sets, so start a new room.

Example:

112
111< Both sets dormant (no bets, waiting for all four sets to show)

221
222< Both sets dormant (No bets)

211
212< Both sets dormant (There are no bets here as I am waiting for all four
sets to show their first two numbers 11,12,21,22
The only possible betting situation is if:

121< Active so far, awaiting next set
12X< This is where a bet would be placed. If it comes 121 you have a winner. If 122 you have a loss and all eight sets are dormant, start a new room. I only place a bet on the last number of any set that is not dormant.

I hope this answers your question. Sorry if it was not clear before. If it still doesn't make any sense, PM me and we'll work it out. Therapy101

Therapy101, you have just put an end to four days of pain and misery for me. As brilliant as Eirescott's method is, I just couldn't figure out a way to incorporate a system that wouldn't get my heart pumping at twice the rate. So generous of you to share with us your approach to betting Eirescott's revolutionary approach to Baccarat.

I am still, however, not completely clear as to where exactly you commence your bets, or if there are triggers that determine where the first bet is placed.

In the examples above you write:

112
211
111< (Now dormant)
221
222 -1 (Now dormant)
121
121 +1 Start new room

... where the first bet occurs on the fifth set.

In the next example, however, the first bet does not occur until set 8:

212
211 (dormant)
111 (dormant)
221
112 (dormant)
222 (dormant
121
122 -1
122 (A repeat pattern, no bet, as sets are dormant. start new room)

From what I am seeing here, there was a betting opportunity on the second and fifth set (and another one on sixth), but you decided not to take any of these bets. While I understand that the second set was too early in the game, I wonder why you chose to pass on the fifth and sixth set, if, in contrast, you took on the fifth set in the previous example? I am also not quite clear as to why the third set is labeled as dormant if no such thing has been done to the first set.

From the following... :

111<1st set
221<2nd set
112<3rd set This 3rd set matches set #1 (first two numbers) If set #4 should begin with 11? it would not only not be considered as a betting opportunity, the room would be abandoned, and a new room started as it would be a pattern match.

One amazing result of watching the first two numbers in a set is: In a new room, if the first four sets contain diferent combinations of 1st two numbers in the set, the fifth set will usually match one of the four previous sets.

... I gather that no bets are placed within the first four sets as a master rule?

In brief, what is the correct time to place the (first?) bet and, apart from dormancy, what is the guiding principle that determines the wait time until the bet is placed?

I'm sure I'm missing something here, which is why your input would be greatly appreciated.

Also, another thing that has just occurred to me to ask - in case of a full set of eight sets without a repeat or in case of full dormancy, can the ninth set be used as the first set of a new room regardless of the fact that it will complete a full nine-set with a repeat, or is it rather prudent to wait until set 9 has completed and we officially have a repeat and use the next set to start a new room? This question may have been covered in Eirescott's original thread, in which case I apologize.

I am also interested to know how many shoes you have tested this against so far? Have you gone through the whole Zumma yet?

Thank you again for any feedback that you may share and a momentous expansion on Eirescott's revolutionary method.

Thanks Therapy101 - and Anderson [for your too kind words at my other post!.]

It's time to play "boggle the mind" again.

Therapy101, this is what I was hoping for - that someone - or some-few - would take it upon themselves to further the concept.

I can only absorb and expel so much re helping and testing and developing.

I want to suggest that you - and anyone doing tests - record which set matched which.

By this I mean - starting at the first set as being set 1 - we record the matched set.

So:

PPP
PBP
BPB
PPB
PBP -----> This - the 5th set - matched the 2nd set.

PBP
BPB
BBP
BPP
PBB
BBB
BPP ------> This - the 7th set - matched the 4th set.

I have a very good reason for this.

Call it the BPP system - or test.

We will see the paradox work within the paradox. We will see that the 5th set will match the 2nd, later the 3rd, and later the 2nd again.

Clearly, there will be more 1st and 2nd and 3rd sets that are the matched sets - but if we look at packaging the matching sets with the matched sets, we will ultimately see something like this:

The 5th set matches matched these sets the last 10 times the 5th set matched something [sounds like a freaking tongue-twister!]:

1,2,4,2,3,2,1,4,3,3

The 6th set matches matched these sets the last 10 times the 6th set matched something:

2,4,3,5,4,3,4,2,1,3

And so on!

EIRESCOTT

Originally Posted by Anderson

Therapy101, you have just put an end to four days of pain and misery for me. As brilliant as Eirescott's method is, I just couldn't figure out a way to incorporate a system that wouldn't get my heart pumping at twice the rate. So generous of you to share with us your approach to betting Eirescott's revolutionary approach to Baccarat.

I am still, however, not completely clear as to where exactly you commence your bets, or if there are triggers that determine where the first bet is placed.

In the examples above you write:



... where the first bet occurs on the fifth set.

In the next example, however, the first bet does not occur until set 8:



From what I am seeing here, there was a betting opportunity on the second and fifth set (and another one on sixth), but you decided not to take any of these bets. While I understand that the second set was too early in the game, I wonder why you chose to pass on the fifth and sixth set, if, in contrast, you took on the fifth set in the previous example? I am also not quite clear as to why the third set is labeled as dormant if no such thing has been done to the first set.

From the following... :



... I gather that no bets are placed within the first four sets as a master rule?

In brief, what is the correct time to place the (first?) bet and, apart from dormancy, what is the guiding principle that determines the wait time until the bet is placed?

I'm sure I'm missing something here, which is why your input would be greatly appreciated.

Also, another thing that has just occurred to me to ask - in case of a full set of eight sets without a repeat or in case of full dormancy, can the ninth set be used as the first set of a new room regardless of the fact that it will complete a full nine-set with a repeat, or is it rather prudent to wait until set 9 has completed and we officially have a repeat and use the next set to start a new room? This question may have been covered in Eirescott's original thread, in which case I apologize.

I am also interested to know how many shoes you have tested this against so far? Have you gone through the whole Zumma yet?

Thank you again for any feedback that you may share and a momentous expansion on Eirescott's revolutionary method.

Hey Anderson. I can appreciate the difficulty trying to make something of these posts. English is such a precise language and one wrong word or comma can make a huge difference. I have made some corrections to the thread. Go back and see if it is more understandable. If not, PM me and we will hash it out. Therapy101

Originally Posted by Therapy101

I flat bet Scotty's System and have never had a losing session. (BigDog & Zumma 1000). For decades I've searched for a system that would win consistently without a progression. I believe this is such a system. Congratulations Scotty on a job well done. Here is the betting strategy I use:
I substitute numbers for B & P as I am able to recognize patterns more easily. P=1, B=2.

So that PPP=111, BPB=212 etc. Here are the eight sets:
Two of the sets have 11 for the 1st two decisions.

111<
112<
121
122
211
212
221
222

Two sets have 11, two have 12, two have 21, and two have 22.
As I record the sets, if one set is: 111; and the next set is 112,
I consider these sets dormant. Should a third set begin with 11,
it is considered as "dead" Example:

111<1st set
221<2nd set
112<3rd set This 3rd set matches set #1 (first two numbers) If set #4 should begin with 11? it would not only not be considered as a betting opportunity, the room would be abandoned, and a new room started as it would be a pattern match.

One amazing result of watching the first two numbers in a set is: In a new room, if the first four sets contain diferent combinations of 1st two numbers in the set, the fifth set will usually match one of the four previous sets. Example:

112
122
211
222 (No repeats of first two numbers in sets)
122<(Matches 2nd set for a win)

I discovered this phenomenon while looking over my records. It won 18 times while losing only twice. On the two losing bets, it won on the next set.

I flat bet only. i start betting after four sets are in the room. I never bet dormant sets. A dormant set is one in which the first two numbers of the set match. Example:

111
112< dormant

A room with dormant sets, but playable:

111<
112<
211<
212< all dormant
221< not dormant
22X< bet here at the "X" Win or lose, start a new room.

I need to apologize to the Forum members for errors in the original thread. Hope this will clear up any misunderstandings. I stand by my original statement: I've never had a losing session. Therapy101

Please go back and read the corrected thread.
As stated above, I apologize for gross errors in my original thread. Don't know what I was thinking. (Maybe I wasn't thinking at all) Sorry for any inconvenience or frustration. I know how important this is to everyone and I really do want to help all the Forum members. Therapy101

So the latest you could start betting would at the eighth level:

111
112
221
222
211
212
121
12BET

And the soonest would be at the fourth level:

111
121
211
221
11BET

You make one bet per room and always on the last element and win or lose you start another room.

I'll have to work some of these before this will really sink in.


Now, I think you said you average 2 units with three rooms started. When you say three rooms do you mean you are playing Eirescotts version of the "roads"?

I'm not claiming to know about the "roads" and so forth - I looked at fun88 and it made no sense to me either.

What I am thinking - based solely on one little post I saw somewhere - is that the "roads" are simply 1st, 2nd, and 3rd starting points from an initial 3 variable set.

PBPPBPPBPBPPBBPBPBBBBPBPBPPBPBPPBPPBPBP

One set would start with reds
One set would start with blacks
One set would start with blues

With the above series, we would have 3 parallel sets

PBP BPP PPB

Whether my assumption is correct or not, this is but one other way to look at sets.

In a real-time sheet, it may look more like this over time:

P-- --- ---
PB- B-- ---
PBP BP- ---

PBP BPP ---
P-- --- ---

PBP BPP P--
PB- B-- ---

A LITTLE WHILE LATER WE WOULD SEE:

PBP BPP PPB
PBP BPP PPB
PBP BPB PBP
BPP PPB PBB
BBP BP- P--

FROM THIS CUBIC LIKE SET-UP WE CAN LOOK AT SETS DOWN COLUMNS, ACROSS LINES FROM LEFT TO RIGHT LIKE READING A BOOK, DIAGONALLY AND LIKELY MORE. AS LONG AS THE FOLLOWING OF SETS IS UNIFORM AND A COMMON PATTERN OF LINES, COLUMNS AND/OR DIAGONALS, YOU HAVE "ROOMS" OR "GROUPS."

EIRESCOTT

Please reread my original thread for corrections. Thanks Therapy101

Originally Posted by dg0412

Sometimes the match will happen on the 6th and 7th sets, and they are very common. Would you not lose money, or at best break even, on flat bet since you will be making a series of bets before the match?

There are not usually a "series" of bets. As Sets become dormant, they no longer enter into the betting scheme. Waiting until the 3rd set to begin betting is usually quite lucrative. If a loss is incurred, start a new room.

Note update in red! Therapy101

Originally Posted by EhtelGaeb

So the latest you could start betting would at the eighth level:

111
112
221
222
211
212
121
12BET

And the soonest would be at the fourth level:

111
121
211
221
11BET

You make one bet per room and always on the last element and win or lose you start another room.

I'll have to work some of these before this will really sink in.


Now, I think you said you average 2 units with three rooms started. When you say three rooms do you mean you are playing Eirescotts version of the "roads"?

Please reread original thread for corrections. Thanks Therapy101

Thanks for sharing, Therapy.

I now get how you bet.
You only bet on the LAST (3rd) element of the set. Although this means you will missed out on some rooms with 4 different sets, but this sounds like it can help to manage your bankroll rather well. From my cards, you will not likely to get more than 3 series of bets except for a killer series like the one below. The most you can lose is 4 units which is very manageable.....

Will give this variations a try. Please kindly let me know if I interpret your tatic incorrectly

Thanks
DG

111
121
211
221
112 <------ -1
122 <------ -1
212 <------ -1
222 <------ -1

Originally Posted by dg0412

Thanks for sharing, Therapy.

I now get how you bet.
You only bet on the LAST (3rd) element of the set. Although this means you will missed out on some rooms with 4 different sets, but this sounds like it can help to manage your bankroll rather well. From my cards, you will not likely to get more than 3 series of bets except for a killer series like the one below. The most you can lose is 4 units which is very manageable.....

Will give this variations a try. Please kindly let me know if I interpret your tatic incorrectly

Thanks
DG

111
121
211
221
112 <------ -1
122 <------ -1
212 <------ -1
222 <------ -1

DG...You've got it man. Good luck. Therapy101

Hello everyone,

this is one real casino shoe. Therapy101 can you play it to see if we get same results? I got 6 Bets, 2 won 4 lost for -2 units.

B P P P P T B P B B B P P P P B P T B P B B B P P P P P P B P P B B P P P B P B P B P B B P B B P P B B B B P P P T P B B

Thanks!

Originally Posted by mogwai

Hello everyone,

this is one real casino shoe. Therapy101 can you play it to see if we get same results? I got 6 Bets, 2 won 4 lost for -2 units.

B P P P P T B P B B B P P P P B P T B P B B B P P P P P P B P P B B P P P B P B P B P B B P B B P P B B B B P P P T P B B

Thanks!

Let me give it a try. Based on LBP, lose one unit. Maybe therapy can further verify i played it correctly?

B P P
P P B
P B B
B P P

P P B
P B P
B B B
P P P
P P P <- no bets cos 2nd element is P so the last element can be B or P

B P P
B B P
P P B
P B P
B P B <- -1
B P B <- no bets

B P P
B B B
B P P

P P B
B

Originally Posted by dg0412

Let me give it a try. Based on LBP, lose one unit. Maybe therapy can further verify i played it correctly?

B P P
P P B
P B B
B P P

P P B
P B P
B B B
P P P
P P P <- no bets cos 2nd element is P so the last element can be B or P

B P P
B B P
P P B
P B P
B P B <- -1
B P B <- no bets

B P P
B B B
B P P

P P B
B

If you copied the decisions correctly, then the play is correct. Therapy101

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Therapy101

I flat bet Scotty's System and have never had a losing session. (BigDog & Zumma 1000). For decades I've searched for a system that would win consistently without a progression. I believe this is such a system. Congratulations Scotty on a job well done. Here is the betting strategy I use:
I substitute numbers for B & P as I am able to recognize patterns more easily. P=1, B=2.

So that PPP=111, BPB=212 etc. Here are the eight sets:
Two of the sets have 11 for the 1st two decisions.

111<
112<
121
122
211
212
221
222

Two sets have 11, two have 12, two have 21, and two have 22.
As I record the sets, if one set is: 111; and the next set is 112,
I consider these sets dormant. Should a third set begin with 11,
it is considered as "dead" Example:

111<1st set
221<2nd set
112<3rd set This 3rd set matches set #1 (first two numbers) If set #4 should begin with 11? it would not only not be considered as a betting opportunity, the room would be abandoned, and a new room started as it would be a pattern match.

One amazing result of watching the first two numbers in a set is: In a new room, if the first four sets contain diferent combinations of 1st two numbers in the set, the fifth set will usually match one of the four previous sets. Example:

112
122
211
222 (No repeats of first two numbers in sets)
122<(Matches 2nd set for a win)

I discovered this phenomenon while looking over my records. It won 18 times while losing only twice. On the two losing bets, it won on the next set.

I flat bet only. i start betting after four sets are in the room. I never bet dormant sets. A dormant set is one in which the first two numbers of the set match. Example:

111
112< dormant

A room with dormant sets, but playable:

1st 111<
2nd 112<
3rd 211<
4th 212< all dormant
5th 221< not dormant
6th 22X< bet here that "X"=1 for a win. If win, start new room. If "X"=2 set is dormant and a loss is incurred. Stay in the room as there are still two sets not in the room.
7th 121< not dormant yet.
8th 12X< bet here that "X"=1 for a match and a win. Start new room. If "X"=2 all eight sets are dormant. Start a new room.

I need to apologize to the Forum members for errors in the original thread. Hope this will clear up any misunderstandings. I stand by my original statement: I've never had a losing session. Therapy101

Hi everyone! Over the weekend had a session I was somewhat disappointed with, in that over ten shoes the profit was a mere +3 units. A win is a win. I played in single rooms throughout the session. Analyzing the data two concepts were prevalent. 1) Waiting to bet until the fifth set, I was missing too many wins. 2) Playing in the same room after a loss resulted in multiple losses. In one room there were three losses, in another four losses. The same session using my original method yielded more than double the wins (+7). Betting after the third set, and leaving the room after a loss doubled the wins. Had I played all three rooms consecutively, (if similar results occured in those rooms), would have yielded +21 units, and that is what I experienced in other sessions. Have any of you had similar results? The "rules" posted earlier are not set in stone. This is a work in progress. The one thing that has not changed is my belief in flat betting this system. Still no losing session and never down any large amount. Good luck. Therapy101

Originally Posted by Therapy101

Hi everyone! Over the weekend had a session I was somewhat disappointed with, in that over ten shoes the profit was a mere +3 units. A win is a win. I played in single rooms throughout the session. Analyzing the data two concepts were prevalent. 1) Waiting to bet until the fifth set, I was missing too many wins. 2) Playing in the same room after a loss resulted in multiple losses. In one room there were three losses, in another four losses. The same session using my original method yielded more than double the wins (+7). Betting after the third set, and leaving the room after a loss doubled the wins. Had I played all three rooms consecutively, (if similar results occured in those rooms), would have yielded +21 units, and that is what I experienced in other sessions. Have any of you had similar results? The "rules" posted earlier are not set in stone. This is a work in progress. The one thing that has not changed is my belief in flat betting this system. Still no losing session and never down any large amount. Good luck. Therapy101

Therapy101,

With this shoe with +3 units, can you please post up the shoe? I am asking because I was wondering if this shoe is a choppy one as opposed to one that is streaky and the results are stuck together.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by DiMenosCor

Therapy101,

With this shoe with +3 units, can you please post up the shoe? I am asking because I was wondering if this shoe is a choppy one as opposed to one that is streaky and the results are stuck together.

Thanks.

I believe he posted that the +3 was for TEN SHOES.

AD

Thanks. I know. Just wondering if the cause is because of choppy shoes. Long streaks that is also sticky with each other are great for me. Yet with choppy shoes? Major ouch.

Much appreciated.

Originally Posted by Therapy101

Hi everyone! Over the weekend had a session I was somewhat disappointed with, in that over ten shoes the profit was a mere +3 units. A win is a win. I played in single rooms throughout the session. Analyzing the data two concepts were prevalent. 1) Waiting to bet until the fifth set, I was missing too many wins. 2) Playing in the same room after a loss resulted in multiple losses. In one room there were three losses, in another four losses. The same session using my original method yielded more than double the wins (+7). Betting after the third set, and leaving the room after a loss doubled the wins. Had I played all three rooms consecutively, (if similar results occured in those rooms), would have yielded +21 units, and that is what I experienced in other sessions. Have any of you had similar results? The "rules" posted earlier are not set in stone. This is a work in progress. The one thing that has not changed is my belief in flat betting this system. Still no losing session and never down any large amount. Good luck. Therapy101

Therapy, what happens if you go back over your older data (with the bet after 4, playing the room til the end) and use the above, bet after 3 and leave the room after a loss?

PM me your email and I will send you the shoes. I am engaged in another session at the moment. Therapy101

PM sent.

When it is convenient for you.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by DiMenosCor

PM sent.

When it is convenient for you.

Thanks.

I ran Multiple Rooms on the ten shoes I emailed you. Came out +18 units. Tried to Post it, but way too large, and it destroys the order of entries. I thought it would be a good opportunity for those who have not yet tried Multiple Rooms. Will PM it to you if you like. Therapy101

Thank you very much Therapy101. I got your email and will decipher and hammer something out.

Choppy shoes are a real pain in the butt for me since my method is ineffective since I have realized I am 50% complete. It was just a total waste of time this weekend for me just roaming around the casino floor looking for the right table with sticky clump up streaks.

Right now it looks like your method and Scotty's method of recording/manipulating the shoe will solve the second half of this puzzle. Once I have something concrete and successfully applied to various physical casinos I will post it up or give it to someone to post it up.

Thanks a bunch.

Hi everyone. Today I played three multiple rooms; recorded, and annotated ten shoes from Zumma 1000. If you are interested, PM me your email address and I'll mail them to you. Therapy101

Originally Posted by EhtelGaeb

Therapy, what happens if you go back over your older data (with the bet after 4, playing the room til the end) and use the above, bet after 3 and leave the room after a loss?

Played The ten shoes using Multiple Rooms. Bet after 3rd set, left Room after a loss. Will email you results if you like. Therapy101